About this Show

[untitled]

NETWORK

DURATION
00:30:00

RATING

SCANNED IN
San Francisco, CA, USA

SOURCE
Comcast Cable

TUNER
Channel 89 (615 MHz)

VIDEO CODEC
mpeg2video

AUDIO CODEC
ac3

PIXEL WIDTH
528

PIXEL HEIGHT
480

TOPIC FREQUENCY

San Francisco 13, Campos 8, Avalos 7, Us 5, Cca 3, Kim 3, Wiener 3, Elsbernd 2, Shell 2, Mar 2, Chu 2, Octavia 2, Mr. Harrington 2, Farrell 2, Olague 2, Cohen 2, America 1, The City 1, Mta 1, Ration 1,
Borrow a DVD
of this show
  SFGTV    [untitled]  

    September 28, 2012
    5:30 - 5:59am PDT  

5:30am
2012. 14 commissions. thank you very much. >> president chiu: good
5:31am
these classes are for folks to actually learn the rules of the road in san francisco. we ride on real street, on felt street, oak street, and paige street, and see how it feels to ride with other people. we talk about the public health department and the police department and our safe routes to school. we're reaching hundreds of kids each year. these are public schools that have been selected throughout the city. we're reaching kindergarten, first, second, and fourth with the safe walking and biking. and we participate in bike to school day in the spring. and walk to school is in october. hopefully a lot of you will come out and partner in that. sellita mentioned we partner in the "light of the night" campaign. we give out more than a thousand bike lights to folks who need them. people who are riding at
5:32am
night without bikes. we know that is a serious hazard. we're out with the police department, with the m.t.a., not just giving out lights, but installing them. we don't let you ride away with light in hand. we install it on your bicycle. we hope to do a lot more in spanish and cantonese language. we're hiring at the bicycling coalition for a spanish-speaking community organizer. we would be excited to have someone on staff who can lead our work in spanish. we want to knowledge there were challenges. if it were all light and easy, you probably wouldn't invited me to speak and talk about the challenges. we have reality challenges and image challenges. i think they're very much related, obvious. i'm highlighting here, and we have copies of the san francisco bicycle coalition where we publicly and directly talk about this. what are the realities? what are the persceptions? and what are the perceptions on the street
5:33am
about people who walk, about people who walk, >> president chiu: the ethics commission will have opportunity to make a presentation of up to 10 minutes explaining its recommendation. after that the mayor will have opportunity to present for up to 20 minutes, with an oral presentation, as to the charges that the mayor has brought. the sheriff will then have an opportunity to make a presentation of up to 20 minutes, followed by a five minute potential rebuttal of the mayor. there will be opportunity for public comment and obviously we will have glib ration at that time. i want it mention to the public that the clerk of the board has already notified the parties and provided the parties with opportunity to submit written response to the ethics commission recommendations and we expect those sponsz by
5:34am
september 25. with that, madam clerk, could you call the consent agenda. >> clerk calvillo: 1 through 10 com comprise the consent age. >> president chiu: colleagues, would anyone like to separate any of those? take a roll call vote on the consent agenda. >> clerk calvillo: items 1 through 10, president chiu, aye. supervisor chu, aye. supervisor cohen, aye. supervisor elsbernd, aye. supervisor farrell, aye. supervisor kim, aye. supervisor mar, aye. supervisor olague, aye. supervisor wiener, aye. supervisor avalos, aye. supervisor campos, aye. >> there are 11 ayes. >> president chiu: those resolutions are adopted and ordinances passed on the first
5:35am
reading. next item. >> clerk calvillo: item 11 is an ordinance amending the police code to modify and eliminate other certain requirements for secondhand and antique dealers setting the permit application fee at $200. >> president chiu: supervisor wiener. >> supervisor wiener: colleagues i have a typographical correction that i need to correct by way of amendment. i provided those to the clerk. i don't know if they've been distributed yet to the board, but they are purely typographical. >> president chiu: mr. clerk, have they been circulated? >> supervisor wiener: my
5:36am
apologies. it's one coming up shortly. please disregard my statement. >> president chiu: colleagues, with regards to item no. 11, could we do this same house, same call? without objection this ordinance is finally passed. item 12. >> clerk calvillo: item 12, ordinance amending the administrative code to authorize the airports commission to enter into leases with entities providing aviation support services without competitive bidding for a term not to exceed 10 years. >> president chiu: same house same call this homeownership is passed. >> the clerk: item 13 ordinance waiving the fee in the public works code for temporary street space occupancy as part of the arts and culture festival on september 15, 2012. >> president chiu: same house, same call, it's passed. >> clerk calvillo: item 14 setting san francisco's rate and pass-through rate for tenants 2012-13. >> president chiu: same house, same call, this ordinance is finally passed. >> the clerk: item 15, ordinance amending the business
5:37am
and tax regulations police and planning codes regarding parking tax simplification for property taxes. >> president chiu: now to supervisor wiener. >> supervisor wiener: as i said before this is what i meant to raise. we have a typographical errors in the ordinance that need to be amended. so we are distributing those. but, colleagues, before we get to that this legislation seeks to simplify the process for small property owners to pay our city's parking tax. under our codes, all people who rent parking spots, even a homeowner who represents a single spot to a neighbor is required to pay the parking tax. small property owners who rent that one spot are treated the same way by our city as the fifth mission garage. we don't distinguish between them. what that means is you have to get fingerprinted, you have to have a background check, you
5:38am
have to buy an expensive revenue control device, you have to get bonded, you have to pay a yearly fee, which can frequently exceed the amount of tax you owe, and you have to pay all taxes collected on a monthly basis. this legislation aims to simplify this process for smaller property owners, those who rent out no more than five parking spots. now, many, many small property owners also have no idea that they even owe this tax. so this legislation will dramatically simplify the payment of parking taxes by people who are renting no more than five parking spots associated with the residential property. by doing that, it will allow more people to come forward and pay. it will increase revenue, particularly for the mta. in addition, because there are so many property owners who have not paid this and had no idea that they were required to pay
5:39am
it, it provides a partial amnesty, whereby from january 1 to june 30 of next year, if a property owner comes forward, pays up to two years worth of back taxes, without penalties or interest, they become legalized and can start paying going forward. they will have to simply fill out a simple form. they will not have to have the revenue control device or the fingerprinting or the background check and will no longer have to pay a fee. they'll just have to pay a tax on a quarterly basis. this legislation, i believe, is a step in the right direction, and i urge your support. >> president chiu: supervisor olague. >> supervisor olague: received and i believe other supervisors did, a request from market and octavia cac to postpone the vote on this until analysis can be drafted by the city planning
5:40am
department, the sfmta. so i would like to support that request by the cac of the market and octavia plan. >> president chiu: is there a motion. >> supervisor olague: making a motion to continue it. >> president chiu: to how long? >> supervisor olague: there's no specific dates because they are asking for some additional analysis by both of those departments so i'm trying to -- i'm not sure how long that would be. maybe a week or two? i guess i'll go two weeks. >> president chiu: okay. supervisor olague has made a motion to continue this item to to weeks. i think that would put it to -- >> clerk calvillo: october 16. >> president chiu: two weeks, october 2nd. is there a second to that motion? motion seconded by supervisor avalos. supervisor wiener. >> supervisor wiener: mr. president, thank you. i will not be supporting this continuance. and this is the first i'm
5:41am
hearing that any member of this body was interested in a continuance. this legislation has been thoroughly and fully vetted and i believe what supervisor olague is referring to is a portion of this legislation. right now, if you rent out a spot in your residence or your building to someone who doesn't live there, our planning code requires that the person live within 1250 feet of the parking spot. this is in the planning code. it's two and a half blocks. it's unenforceable. it depresses the price of parking inconsistent with city policy and also undermines the city policy of disaggregating housing and parking. it also has problems because, if you have only a small pool of people to whom you can rent as a small property owner, where whoever rents your spot is
5:42am
likely to have access to your home, you have less choice in terms of making sure that you're comfortable with the person to whom you are renting. so this legislation would change that 1250 foot rule, and specify that you are required to rent to someone who resides in the city and county of san francisco. the planning commission evaluated this and supported this by a 6-1 vote. and this came out unanimously from the budget committee. so i think that this is a piece of citywide legislation. i think it makes a lot of sense. and i think we should be moving forward today, and there's no reason to continue it based on an e-mail that was sent at 11:00 the night before, where there had been no outreach beforehand, to me, or to anyone else that i'm aware of about continuing it. and i don't think that the reasons stated are valid so i'll be voting against this continuance request. >> president chiu: any further discussion on the motion to continue, colleagues?
5:43am
>> i just had a quick question on the continuance. >> president chiu: supervisor kim. >> supervisor kim: how much time would be needed for an assessment? >> supervisor olague: i don't know what mta's schedule is like so that's why i gave it two weeks because i'm not clear on how they -- you know, what their capacity is. >> president chiu: if folks could speak into the microphone and please ask to be acknowledged on the roster. supervisor wiener. >> supervisor wiener: i think that response frankly speaks volumes that, you know, that there's been no thought given to how much time would be required. i want to be very clear. the planning -- this is planning code. the planning department has already evaluated this. the planning staff supports it. the planning commission voted to support it. they've done that analysis already. this is a citywide piece of legislation. it's not specific to market octavia.
5:44am
and i don't see any reason to do a continuance. >> president chiu: supervisor avalos. >> supervisor avalos: thank you. we had this discussion at budget and finance committee and i ended up supporting the legislation, and most of all because it really seemed to be difficult to enforce this rule. and i just felt it was probably just too much work to actually want to weigh in on something that was not necessarily going to be enforceable. so i'm actually -- i seconded the motion to continue, but, you know, i expect that we'll have a vote probably -- it might not pass, the continuance, and i'll be ready to vote for the legislation. actually, i withdraw my second of the motion to continue. >> clerk calvillo: i have recorded it was supervisor campos who seconded the motion. >> supervisor avalos: that's fine. >> president chiu: supervisor
5:45am
olague made the motion seconded by supervisor campos. supervisor his campos. >> supervisor campos: i seconded the motion as a courtesy to my colleague. i don't know if there's a need for a continuance. my understanding is that -- normally, when you want a continuance along those lines, you want to make sure that you talk to the author of it. and so i wanted to, you know, out of deference second the motion. but i'm not convinced that there is a need to continue it. >> president chiu: supervisor campos, are you withdrawing your second? you'll keep your second. okay. supervisor olague. >> supervisor olague: out of respect for the market octavia committee, are i wanted to respect their request for additional information. i'm familiar with planning department's work product and how much time they take but mta i'm not. it's not that it's not well thought out but i'm not familiar
5:46am
with their capacity at this time. i'm happy with withdraw the motion and we can just vote on the legislation. i was doing it out of courtesy to a cac who is very involved and active and we're active in a plan that really did do some interesting work around parking requirements and transportation. so i'm happy to withdraw the motion. >> president chiu: so i understand that supervisor olague has withdrawn her motion. one thing i would say, colleagues, i know things come up at the last minute but to the extent that we can give each other heads up on issues so we can resolve things beforehand that would be great. unless there is further discussion, why don't we take a roll call vote on item 15. >> clerk calvillo: item 15, propriety chiu, aye. supervisor chu, aye. supervisor cohen, aye. supervisor elsbernd, aye. supervisor farrell, aye. supervisor kim, aye. supervisor mar, aye. supervisor olague, no.
5:47am
supervisor wiener, aye. supervisor avalos, aye. supervisor campos, aye. there are 10 ayes and one no. >> president chiu: this ordinance is passed on the first reading. colleagues, why don't we take up items 16 and 17, having to do with the proposed clean power sf program. madam clerk. >> clerk calvillo: item 15 i is... >> president chiu: 16 and 17. >> clerk calvillo: item 16 is an ordinance amending the administrative code to -- the customer fund and reserve fund and appropriating 19.5 million of hetch hetchy bal to support
5:48am
the clean power aggregation program and placing 6 million appropriated for clean power sf sustainability services on budget and finance committee reserve pending detailed appropriation plans. mr. president, you wanted me to read item 17 as well? >> president chiu: yes please. >> clerk calvillo: item 17 resolution authorizing public utilities commission to launch clean power sf program approving local sustainability program for customers and authorizing general manager of the public utilities for a term of up to five years for services required to launch the clean power sf program. >> president chiu: supervisor campos. >> supervisor campos: thank you very much, mr. president. i'll be very brief. you know, the efforts to make community choice aggregation a reality in san francisco have been going on for many years. i spoke to assembly member ammiano who reminded me that he's been working on these
5:49am
issues for 14 years. and so i want to simply, at some point, turn it over to the general manager of the public utilities commission, but i just want to make a couple of just acknowledgements. there have been many people who have been working on this program for the last number of years. and i want to begin today by acknowledging the work of the san francisco public utilities commission, in particular the general manager ed harrington, who has been, in the last, you know, over a year and a half, that i've been the chair of lafco, trying to make sure that we put together a program that tries to achieve the goals underlying community -- aggregation but does so in a fiscally responsible way and i think that he has struck the right balance. i know that the program that is before you is not as ambitious and aggressive a program as many people wanted but i think that it's a program that at the end
5:50am
ensures success and viability and that's why i'm proud to support it. i thank the rest of the puc staff who put so many hours in the last three years in this program. i want to acknowledge the staff of the local agency formation commission and various commissioners including members of this board of supervisors who have served on lafco and of course we have here supervisor avalos, supervisor olague, supervisor mar, who are members of lafco. there are a number of people also who have, in the last few years, enacted legislation, including passing ordinances here at the board of supervisors, that have made cca a possibility and beginning with the father of cca in san francisco assembly member tom ammiano as well as state senator mark leno, supervisor mirkarimi who chaired lafco for a number of years as well as former state senator carol
5:51am
mington. i want to acknowledge the work of the city attorney. the city attorney's office has put a number of hours to make sure this is a legally sound and defendable a program as we possibly can have so i want to thank teresa mueller, john soleil and members of her team. a special thanks to the advocates of community choice aggregation who over the years have rallied behind this effort which at the end of the day is really about providing consumers a choice making sure that ratepayers in san francisco have opportunity to not only have clean energy but to have a meaningful choice, to make sure that there are other players in the business of providing energy beyond the utility that has had a monopoly for so long. the last point that i want to make is that i want to acknowledge that we have heard from members of the labor community, and specifically the labor council who have expressed some concerns around the fact that the contract that's before
5:52am
you involves shell oil company, and i don't know that any one of us who supports cca is in any way going to be here defending shell. but to the extent that shell, being in the picture, is an issue, that's an issue that's been a problem for quite some time because each and every one of us, by virtue of being a consumer and a customer of pg&e is actually in some respects getting energy from shell because pg&e isself is actually buying energy from shell. to the extent that's a concern i actually think cca provides an opportunity for us to get out of the business of doing business with shell. because it allows us, down the road, to create a build-out that will enable the city and county of san francisco to create its own energy, generate its own energy. with that i wanted to given the
5:53am
general manager of the public utilities commission an opportunity to make some remarks, and again i want to thank mr. harrington. i have had the honor and the privilege to work with you in the last few years. and as far as i'm concerned you truly are the gold standard of what it means to be a public servant. and the fact that you have been involved i think gives this program the credibility that it needs. and so i want to thank you. mr. harrington. >> thank you very much. ed harrington general manager sf public utilities commission. i know we spent a lot of time last week in the budget committee. i was asked to give a brief overview to make sure you were aware of what was in the program. i'm joined by barbara hale and todd rydstrom our cfo and assistant general manager for finance and business, if you have questions of any of us.
5:54am
i want to go through a quick introduction, what the city goals are, the key program components, what the liabilities may be and ratepayer impacts. san francisco has ambitious climate goals and so right now we're looking and saying we have a goal to achieve greenhouse -- electric system by 2030, reducing carbon emissions by 80% from 1990 levels. this program before you was a single program that has any chance to make a big dent in what's going on there. there's nothing in the horizon that has something like that. it has a mechanism affecting the climate change. i'm a renter. i'm not going to put solar on my roof but i can go out there, in my case, for $8 a month i will be able to have clean green power. nothing i can do will approach that, incredibly efficiently. we're talking about doing it for
5:55am
90,000 people and growing after that. the long-term goal is not to be buying power from shell. the long-term goal is to do our own generation, to control the assets and control the costs. that's how you start to do a good job for your citizens to make sure you have control of your rates and your cost. to put this in perspective, it's a bit busy, in the last few years, and going on to the next several years with the sunset solar, we're going to spend over $90 million and that $90 million will have an impact worth about 6900, 7,000 homes, reduction in greenhouse gases in san francisco. this program, where we're asking you to appropriate $19.5 million, six of it spent on things like energy conservation, 13 million hopefully never spent but held in abeyance, that will immediately have an impact for greenhouse reduction for 90,000
5:56am
homes. there's nothing else that anyone's thought of with that dramatic impact for san francisco with such a small dollar amount, an efficient way of spending your money. key program components. choice, it is a choice -- i realize it's an opt out program but we will give people a choice and make sure they understand it. 30 megawatts to start, about 90,000 participants. 100% green. for every kilowatt hour of energy people consume an equivalent amount of renewable energy and put into the system. that does not mean there is an extension cord to a turning thing, wind turbine in the east bay. it means it's going into the bucket of power and we're taking that much out of the bucket of power. you can't check every molecule but we're saying it's green, not just some fake thing. we're putting as much in when we take out. it doesn't mean hetchy produces,
5:57am
it means we put inasmuch as we take out. public-private partnership, this is not a takeover of pg&e. pg&e would still be the people who you call to get the service connected. if you have problems, they will be the ones to do something about it, they will do the energy billing and transmission distribution. we're just giving them better, greener power to use. electric suppliers -- shell energy for the first five years and noble america will do interaction with people, an on-site thing. mitigation of risk. we have done a lot of work to try to figure out how we can target this to the people who are most accepting of it and want to join this program. we're talking about going out and going after the first 90,000 people in the precincts of san francisco, that our poalg shows us want this the most. that means we affect the least number of people to get the best
5:58am
result out of it. opt out notices will be sent and we expect over half of those will stay with this program and not opt out. city appropriation, again 19.5 million, but a lot of that money is for other things we'd like not to just pay for it this program. there is some environmental incentives going to people who are in the program to give them incentive to be in the program. 2 million energy efficiency, 2 million growth seller and 2 million to start the work. that is again the big thing. if this was all the program was going to be, it would be good but not the program we want in san francisco. start date, if you pass this and it goes through the process we will be ready to start in the spring of next year. the opt out program, again, that's the state law. that's the way it's supposed to work. we will give people two opt out notices before we start to deliver power, to opt out
5:59am
notices after we start giving power and after that they have the option of opting out. we have a rate of $5 as a processing fee or a departure fee if people leave the program after that. that, we've had discussions about is not important. we really don't want to catch people. we want it to be their choice. community outreach, clearly this is based on having a significant education effort to make sure that people, especially people that are monolingual non-english speaking know what they're in for. low income discount, while not required in the program we suggest the lower income discount extend to side two which is a 20% discount for low income customers. we have a million dollars of the money you've appropriated already that we've set aside for this education in public education program. we're talking about paid media, multi-lingual television radio